Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-10-15
DAILY HERALD.
UECIDEU.
rAe SAN Joaquin Ranch Again
on the Market.


Judge Hutton yesterday rendered
his decision in the case of A. f. Davis
AGAINST w. D. Smith and the Trustees
of the Irvine estate, which case was
brou pht to settle the dispute arising
in relation to the sale OF the San
Joaouin rancho. This decision will
place the property again on the mar
ket and Yesterday afternoon Lieuten-
ant G overnor White telegraphed to
Mr.. f. B. Mastick at San Francisco,
and the probabilities are that arrange
ments for the resale will be made at
once. Following is the text Of Judge
Hutton's decision:
This action was commenced July Goth,
1897. In the plaintiffs complaint it is AL
legged that James Irvine, on the 9th day of
June, 1885, made his last will and testa-
ment, the material provisions OF which are
set forth, but are hereinafter stated; it is
also alleged that he died in San Francisco
on March 15, 1886, and on April 8, 1856,
the will was duly admitted to probate by the
Superior Court of the city and county of San
Francisco, and the defendants other than
w. D. smith were duly appointed the exc
cutors, and have ever since been such exc
cutors and the trustees of the several trusts
declared in the will.
That on October 10, 1856, the property
involved in this action was duly distributed
and set apart to the said trustees as such.
That on the 10th day of July, 1887, the
said trustees offered for sale and agreed to
sell the real property involved herein, con
sisting of the Rsnchos San joaquin and Lo-
man de Santiago, and a portion of the
Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana excepting
certain tracts not material to be mentioned.) J
The terms OF the proposed sale are also al
legged in the complaint, but since they will
be hereafter stated it is only necessary to say
that it is alleged: at was further stated in
the said offer and agreement that of the land
therein proposed to be sold there were not
less than 100, 900 acres, and that the highest
bidder should have the property.
Ii is then further alleged in the complaint
that the property was off red for sale on the
18th day of July, SS7, to the highest bid
der, in pursuance of said offer and agree
ment, at the office of Messrs. Bicknells d
White, IN this city; that at the sale the
plaintiff and the defendant Smith were bid
ders; that the plaintiff bid for the property
the sum of 81, 1856 900, which sum was the
highest and best bid land the property was
struck down to him, but afterwards the
said sale, so declared to have been made to
the plaintiff, was changed by the auc-
tioneer, and declared sold to the defendant
Smith for the sum of 81 $50, ,0O0;' that the
price agreed to be paid was fair price; that
he had complied, or offered to comply with
the terms of the sale, and is yet ready to
perform; that all the trustees, except the de-
PENDANT George Irvine, are willing to convey
to him.
The plaintiff prays Judgment that the
trustees be enjoined from making the sale or
q conveyance to defendant, Smith; that
they be required to convey to him, the
plaintiff, upon his complying with the terms
of the sale; and for costs and general relief.
THE ANSWER.
The defendant Smith, answering separ.
ately and admitting all the allegations Of
the complaint not denied, denies that the
property was offered for sale in pursuance
only of the terms alleged, but AYERS there
were other terms and conditions mutually
agreed upon by all the parties; he denie,
that according to such terms as agreed upor
the plaintiff bid for the property 81 ,3S5 900
or any sum in excess of 81 1875 600, or tina
according to such terms the plaintiffs bic
was the highest or that any change wa!
made by the auctioneer in declaring the sale
He then set up affirmatively his version Of
the facts as to the sale, alleging that it wa,
there, at the suggestion of the plaintiff
mutually agreed by all parties that the time
for receiving bids should be limited to hal
an hour from the time the property was of
fered for sale; and that it was further under
stood and agreed that J. ID. Bicknell shoulC
act as referee and time-keeper should re
ceive bids and decide questions of difference
parties; and that thereby time was mad
the essence of said offer and of said sale
that within the thirty minutes the highes
bid was made by him, the same bein
81, 100000, and no subsequent bid was mad
in time; that thereupOn the said Bicknel
announced that the time had expired an,
the land was sold for $1,2sO,OOO, b.
inadvertence he mentioned the plaintiff
as purchaser, and seeing his mistake he i'm
mediately corrected the same and announced
the defendant, Smith as the purchaser; that
he made no bid after the plaintiffs offer o
81 ,3S5, 900, because of the said agreement
limiting the time. He also alleges the fair
ness of the price bid by him; his offer a nc
Willingness and ability to perform on hi,
part, and demand for the deed. He denie.
the willingness of the four trustees to con
yey to plaintiff.
The prayer, mutdtis mntdndis, is similar to
that of the plaintiff
The remaining defendants answer Jointly
and set forth copy of the last will and tes-
lament of James Irvine, deceased, to show
their powers and duties with respect to the
property; also copy of the offer in writing
to sell the property, and allege that at the
time of the sale there were present only
three of the trustees, the defendants Mas
tick, Byrne and George Irvine, and that the
limit to one-hour was agreed upon by the
parties present desirous of bidding. the
three trustees cOnsenting
As to the last bids, etc., the following i.
the language of their answer: "And a bid OF
81 1,38O,O00 was made by the co-defendant
Smith, at and upon the expiration of sale
thirty minutes; whereupon said Bicknel
called time; Immediately thereafter, and a.
soon as the same could be spoken, the plain
tiff bid 81 1856, 900, and no further or othel
bids were made and the said Bicknell there
upon said: You have it, addressing the
plaintiff, supposing at the time that the bic
of $1,3SO,O00 was made by the plaintiff
600 was made by the cO-defendant Smith =
that each of the bidders then rendered theil
check for $4,000, duly certified, but de
seudant refused to accept them or to award
the sale to either the plaintiff or to Smith
They deny that since the controversy ha.
arisen all of them except George Irvine are
willing to convey to the plaintiff.
Their prayer is that the plaintiff take moth
ing and that they recover their costs.
The foregoing constitute the pleadings in
the case. 1t is in my opinion questionable
whether they would support a judgment for
some of the relief which one or more of the
parties on the trial and argument seem tc
think the court should award. But since
no question was made by any of the attor
neys, shall consider the case as though the
pleadings were full and in all respects sat
isfactory to the court.
THE STATEMENT OF FACTS
The following is q sufficient statement OF
the facts i'll addition to those hereinbefore
appearing as admitted in the pleadings.
James Irvine, now deceased, by his last
will and testament devised and bequeathed
all of his property to the trustees defendant
and one other who has since resigned. in
trust for the uses and purposes therein
stated.
Certain lots in the city of San Francisco
and 1880 acres of the lands in this county
are to be held by the trustees in trust for his
son James and conveyed to him when he
shall attain the age of twenty-five years; be.
quests of land and moneys were made 10 his
wife and various other persons, and his son
James was made the residuary devisee and
residuary devisees and legatees in the event
of the sons death before attaining the age OF
twenty-five years.
BY the terms of the will the trustees are
empowered to take the possession and con.
troll of all of the property, and at such times
and upon such terms as to them
may seem best, but within tbe
period of five years from his decease To sci
and convey SO much of the real and persona
property exclusive of that be eonveyef
10 his son) in Los Angeles county as NAV h,
necessary TO raise an amount the one-haif a
which, added to the income or revenue from
the lands, will discharge the money legacies
1t is further directed that; 'they (the trus
tees) may lease, demise, grant, bargain sci
of